Posted Jan 5, 2006 9:52 UTC (Thu) by eludias
In reply to: Goodbye semaphores?
Parent article: Goodbye semaphores?
@@ -0,0 +1,135 @@
+Generic Mutex Subsystem
+started by Ingo Molnar <email@example.com>
+ "Why on earth do we need a new mutex subsystem, and what's wrong
+ with semaphores?"
...and boils down to: smaller data (16 instead of 20 bytes/mutex), smaller code, faster (because of unknown bug in semaphore implementation), stricter semantics since a mutex in 'owned' by the locker while a semaphore shares ownership between all lockers.
to post comments)